Good LORD! A Journalist Who Is....A JOURNALIST!

[Subdeacon Joe]

He can think, and reason, and everything!

 

My idea is to look at the shooting as a shooting, not as an avatar of social malaise, a tragedy or an inevitability. Instead, let’s determine what can be learned from the few facts known and considered incontrovertible. I am no expert but I do know a little about this stuff.

 

The four shots that hit Michael Brown in the right arm, according to autopsy drawing provided by Dr. Michael Baden at the insistence of Brown’s own parents, penetrated the outside, leading edge of that limb, just inside the bone. Thus it seems unlikely that those shots, assuming they came directly from in front, could have penetrated the arm at those locations while maintaining a front-to-rear angle.

Try this simple test. Raise your arms. In that position, examine which surface of your arm is vulnerable to frontally incoming gunshots. Clearly, it is the inside, unless you torque your arms inward in order to make the outsides vulnerable to incoming shots, an inconceivable notion. As I see it, Brown’s arms were not up when he was shot, at least four of the six times.

Or let me put it this way. Stand naturally. Place your left forefinger on a spot you determine to equate to one of the wounds. You’ll see that it faces the front. Now, keeping the finger in place, raise the arm. NOW the spot faces the rear and the bullet direction is clearly front to rear.

Next examine the pattern of the four shots. Beginning at the thumb, they are spaced a few inches apart, in a rising line on a rightward bias, essentially climbing the arm. I see this pattern on the handgun range all the time, as do most shooters. It is a consequence of shooting quickly without aiming, a sure signature of a shooter in a panic mode (as when being charged by a much larger assailant) or someone preparing for just such a moment.

 

 

 

 

[Calamity Kris]

Well said!!

[Lazarus Longshot, SASS #44254 Life]

Excellent and well thought out article. He makes way too much sense and is way too logical for any of the mainstream media to pay attention. Plus, with cogent writing like this, they're going to kick him out of the Journalists' union. There wasn't near enough emotionalism in there.

 

Laz

[DocWard]

Pretty impressive.

[Utah Bob #35998]

While I basically agree with the article, in my opinion it's not up to a journalist to determine the results but the pathologist. I'm not sure of his expertise in that field. I know he knows about guns. But I don't know if his background in examination of shootings and gunshot wounds comes from real experience or watching CSI. I have an old autopsy report somewhere that clearly indicates which wounds are entry, exit and re-entry. This sketch doesn't. At least in the resolution here.

 

I think both he, and the journalists who publish stories that contradict the autopsy and fan the flames, should probably just wait until expert testimony is given. But of course that won't happen.

 

No gray areas.

[Ace_of_Hearts]

When you PAY for an autopsy.......

You will most often get an opinion biased towards the outcome you desire.

[Jess Money]

When you PAY for an autopsy.......

You will most often get an opinion biased towards the outcome you desire.

 

+1